### 53423 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 166 / Friday, August 26, 2011 / Notices

Act (NEPA) coverage for the proposed

action.

The ROD discusses each alternative considered for the proposed action and those that are environmentally preferable. The Corps has identified an Adaptive Management Implementation Process (AMIP), with a construction ceiling of Alternative 3.5 (approximately 4,370 acres), as the selected plan. The key aspect of the AMIP is that, rather than selecting a specific acreage alternative, actions would be progressively implemented and monitored until the desired biological response of terns and plovers is attained and sustained. The Corps recognizes
that alternative methods such as vegetation removal, while relatively untested, provide the potential to decrease impacts and costs, and could be incorporated if proven successful.

The FPEIS describes the potential environmental consequences of the alternatives considered in detail. During analysis, impacts of the larger alternatives (3, 2 and 1) were deemed to be moderate to high and impacts of lesser alternatives (3.5, 4 and 5) were
deemed to be moderate to low. Alternative 3.5 represents a midrange of
habitat available at a time when the birds were productive, and it is anticipated that biological metrics will be met before fully implementing up to Alternative 3.5. If Alternative 3.5 is fully implemented and biological metrics are not met, the Corps can consider continuing to higher acreage alternatives or other methodologies, in which case appropriate coordination and disclosure would be pursued (potential amended ROD or additional NEPA).

The AMIP allows for flexibility to provide habitat up to a point of meeting population goals, and to minimize impacts through approaches such as monitoring, redistributing acreage targets among segments if needed,avoiding sensitive resources, using lessimpactful or costly construction methodologies as they become available, and avoiding over-construction of
habitat.

Implementing the selected alternative will provide the most effective means for the Corps to meet its obligations, including avoiding jeopardy to the bird species, while managing the river for all authorized purposes. Risk of significant impacts to the environment appears to
be low to moderate as a result of implementation of the ESH program,
and numerous acres of ESH would be created, which is considered important not only to protected bird species, but to the overall ecology of the Missouri

River. Concurrently with the ROD, an errata sheet is also being made available, which provides the comments received on the Final PEIS along with the Corps response to each. Also included in the errata is an update regarding Tribal
coordination and the PEIS.

2. Document Availability. The Final PEIS (May 2011), the ROD, the errata sheet, and an updated Final PEIS which incorporates the ROD and the errata items (August 2011), are available at: http://www.moriverrecovery.org/mrrp/ f?p=MRRP:documents

. For more information about the Emergent Sandbar Habitat program, please visit http:// www.moriverrecovery.org under ‘‘BiOp/
Mit Efforts.’’

Dated: August 15, 2011.
Christopher D. Wiehl,
Acting Chief, Planning Branch, Omaha

District.

[FR Doc. 2011–21894 Filed 8–25–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3720–58–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers** 

**Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/**  **Environmental Impact Report for the**
**Section 408 Permission for the Southport Sacramento River Early**  **Implementation Project, West Sacramento, CA** 

**AGENCY :**  Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; DoD.

**ACTION :**  Notice of intent.

**SUMMARY :**  Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) intends to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) under Section
14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (as amended) (33 U.S.C. 408), and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), for the proposed Southport Sacramento River Early Implementation Project (EIP), sponsored by the West Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (WSAFCA). Figures of the project area can be viewed at http://www.cityofwestsacramento.org/ city/flood.

WSAFCA is planning the Southport Sacramento River EIP to implement flood-risk reduction measures along the
Sacramento River South Levee in the City of West Sacramento, Yolo County, CA. The project reach extends along the right bank of the Sacramento River south of the barge canal, downstream approximately 6.4 miles to the South Cross Levee, protecting the Southport community of West Sacramento. The 3.3-square mile study area encompasses the area of levee improvement along the river corridor and the potential soil borrow sites. In order to implement the project, the sponsor must acquire permission from USACE to alter the Federal project under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (as amended) (33 U.S.C. 408 or, Section 408). USACE also has authority under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) over activities involving the discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States, which are known to be in the project area. The project would bring the levee up to
standard with Federal and state flood protection criteria, as well as providing opportunities for ecosystem restoration and public recreation. USACE, acting as the federal lead agency under NEPA, and WSAFCA, acting as the state lead agency under the CEQA in coordination with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, have determined that an EIS/EIR should be prepared to describe alternatives, potential environmental effects, and mitigation measures.

**DATES :**  Public scoping meetings will be held on Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. at the West
Sacramento Recreation Center, 2801 Jefferson Boulevard, West Sacramento, CA. Send written comments by September 26, 2011 (see **ADDRESSES**).

**ADDRESSES :**  Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope and
content of the environmental information may be submitted to Mr. John Suazo, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, Attn: Planning Division (CESPK–PD–R), 1325 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. Requests to be placed on the mailing list
also should be sent to this address.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Questions about the proposed actions and environmental review process should be addressed to John Suazo at (916) 557–6719, e-mail: john.suazo@usace.army.mil (see

**ADDRESSES**).

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

1. Proposed Action. WSAFCA is proposing a project along the
Sacramento River west levee under the California DWR’s Early Implementation Program to expeditiously complete
flood-risk reduction measures. Known as the Southport Sacramento River EIP, the project proposes implementation of
flood-risk reduction measures


### 53424 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 166 / Friday, August 26, 2011 / Notices

(measures) along a 6.4-mile long reach between the barge canal downstream to the South Cross Levee. Primary
deficiencies of the levee include through-seepage, under-seepage, and embankment instability (e.g., overly steepened slopes). As part of the project, an EIS/EIR is being prepared. USACE has authority under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (as amended) (33 U.S.C. 408), over
alterations to federal flood control project levees and any such alterations as proposed by WSAFCA are subject to approval by USACE. USACE also has authority under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) over activities involving the discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States, which are known to be in the project area. Under Section 10 of the Rives and Harbors Act, the District Engineer may permit activities which do not affect navigable waters. Due to these authorities, USACE is acting as the lead agency for the EIS pursuant to NEPA. WSAFCA will be acting as the lead agency for the EIR according to CEQA as the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out and approving the project.

2. Alternatives. The EIS/EIR will
consider several alternatives for reducing flood damage. Each alternative analyzed during the investigation will
consist of a combination of several measures to reduce the risk of flooding. These measures include, but are not limited to, installing slurry cutoff walls, constructing seepage or stability berms, relief wells, rock slope protection, slope flattening, and potential new levee alignments (setback or adjacent levees).

3. Scoping Process. a. Public scoping meetings will be held on September 15, 2011, to present information to the public and to receive comments from the public on the project. These meetings are intended to initiate the process to involve concerned individuals, and local, State, and Federal agencies.

b. Significant issues to be analyzed in depth in the environmental documents include effects on hydraulics, wetlands and other waters of the U.S., vegetation and wildlife resources, special-status species, aesthetics, cultural resources, recreation, land use, fisheries, agricultural resources, water quality, air quality, transportation, and socioeconomics; and cumulative effects of related projects in the study area.

c. USACE is consulting with the State Historic Preservation Officer to comply
with the National Historic Preservation
Act and with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to comply with the Endangered Species Act. USACE also is coordinating
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to comply with the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act.

d. A 45-day public review period will be provided for individuals and agencies to review and comment on the
draft environmental document. All interested parties are encouraged to respond to this notice and provide a current address if they wish to be
notified of the draft EIS/EIR circulation.

4. Availability. The draft EIS/EIR for the Southport Sacramento River EIP is scheduled to be available for public
review and comment in mid-2012.

Dated: August 17, 2011.
William J. Leady,
COL, EN, Commanding.

[FR Doc. 2011–21878 Filed 8–25–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3720–58–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers** 

**Intent To Prepare a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for** 
**the Larose to Golden Meadow Hurricane Protection Project, Post**  **Authorization Change Study, in Lafourche Parish, LA** 

**AGENCY :**  Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

**ACTION :**  Notice of intent.

**SUMMARY :**  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) intends to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for the Larose to
Golden Meadow Hurricane Protection Project, Post-Authorization Change (PAC) Study. This project was originally authorized in 1965. Construction began in 1972 and is still underway. The PAC Study was initiated to identify and
evaluate modifications needed to ensure that completion of project features, designed and constructed before development of the post-Katrina Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS) Design Guidelines, are in compliance with these new guidelines.

The subject SEIS will supplement the original environmental impact statement (EIS) prepared for the project
as authorized in 1965. The Statement of Findings for the original EIS was signed on April 4, 1975. An SEIS was subsequently prepared to address proposed modifications to the authorized plan. The Record of Decision for this first SEIS was signed on May 20,

1985. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Questions concerning the draft SEIS
should be addressed to Charlene Carmack, Rock Island District, Corps of Engineers, CEMVP–PD–C, Clock Tower Building, P.O. Box 2004, Rock Island, IL 61204–2004; telephone (309) 794–5570; fax (309) 794–5157; or be e-mail: Charlene.Carmack@usace.army.mil.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

1. Authority. This SEIS will be the second supplement to the EIS originally prepared for the Larose to Golden Meadow Hurricane Protection Project. This project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 27 October 1965, House Document No. 184, 89th Congress (Pub. L. 89–298), which authorized the project ‘‘hurricane-flood protection at Grand Isle and Vicinity, Louisiana’’ to provide protection in
accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers in his report entitled ‘‘Grand Isle and Vicinity, La.’’,
and contained in House Document No. 184, Eighty-ninth Congress, 1st Session. The authorized project is a ring levee system with associated control structures that provides hurricane and storm damage risk reduction to communities located along both sides of Bayou Lafourche in Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. The overall levee system is approximately 43 miles long, extending from Larose to a point 2 miles south of Golden Meadow, Louisiana. Roughly 25,000 people live in the communities of Larose, Galliano, Cutoff, and Golden Meadow, which are located within the ring levee system.

2. Alternatives. Alternatives currently being evaluated in the PAC Study include: (1) Stabilize the existing levee using current criteria for still-water elevations, which would complete the project without exceeding the 1965
authorized elevation listed in the Grand Isle, Louisiana, and Vicinity General Design Memorandum (with datum adjustments), and meet the current approved design guidelines excluding the Post-Hurricane Katrina hydrology and hydraulics design guidelines; (2) modify the 1965 design to complete the project providing a level of risk reduction based on the 1965 storm surge design elevations (with datum adjustments) using the current HSDRRSDesign Guidelines to include the PostHurricane Katrina surge models; (3) complete the existing levee system in general conformance with the previously authorized design. These
alternatives will be further formulated and developed during the scoping process and an appropriate range of
alternatives will be considered in the new SEIS. These may include